59-61 E. 3rd St., LLC v Said

Annotate this Case
[*1] 59-61 E. 3rd St., LLC v Said 2015 NY Slip Op 51846(U) Decided on December 18, 2015 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on December 18, 2015
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Lowe, III, P.J., Shulman, Ling-Cohan, JJ.
570805/15

59-61 East 3rd Street, LLC, Petitioner-Landlord-Respondent, -

against

Samir Said, Paul Said d/b/a Café Khufu, Respondents-Tenants-Appellants.

Tenants, as limited by their brief, appeal from that portion of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Robert R. Reed, J.), dated March 29, 2013, which, upon reargument and renewal, adhered to a prior order awarding landlord a final judgment of possession in a holdover summary proceeding.

Per Curiam.

Order (Robert R. Reed, J.), dated March 29, 2013, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with $10 costs.

We sustain the possessory judgment awarded in favor of landlord, inasmuch as the undisputed evidence established that the commercial tenant violated the terms of the two- attorney, so-ordered stipulation settling the underlying holdover summary proceeding by failing to provide "free and unfettered" access to landlord to complete renovations at the subject premises. Strict enforcement of the parties' stipulation, including the entry of a possessory judgment, serves the State's interest in efficient dispute resolution and is essential to the proper management of court calendars and the integrity of the litigation process (see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d 224, 230 [1984]; Hotel Cameron, Inc. v Purcell, 35 AD3d 153 [2006]).

We note that tenant was evicted on September 18, 2013.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: December 18, 2015

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.